The current study examined whether directly altering affective associations involving a relationship partner through evaluative conditioning can lead to changes in relationship satisfaction. Married couples ( N = 144) were asked to view a brief stream of images once every 3 days for 6 weeks. Embedded in this stream were pictures of the partner, which, according to random assignment of couples to experimental group, were paired with either positive or neutral stimuli. Couples also completed measures of automatic partner attitudes and explicit marital satisfaction at baseline and once every 2 weeks for 8 weeks. Spouses who viewed their partners paired with positive stimuli demonstrated more-positive automatic partner attitudes than did control spouses, and these attitudes predicted increased self-reported marital satisfaction over time. These results provide novel evidence for a mechanism of change in relationship satisfaction, represent a step toward documenting how strong attitudes can evolve through passive exposure to information, and suggest novel avenues for relationship interventions.

Migrant farmwork is often characterized by harsh working conditions that carry significant physical and mental health consequences. Using a learned helplessness framework, the current study examined the extent to which discrimination, immigration legal status difficulties, and adverse childhood experiences moderated the effects of harsh working conditions on depression and anxiety. The study also examined the extent to which harsh working conditions mediated the effects of discrimination, immigration legal status difficulties, and adverse childhood experiences on depression and anxiety. Participants were 241 migrant farmworkers recruited in the Midwest. Participants completed interviews consisting of the Migrant Farmworker Stress Index (MFWSI), Adverse Childhood Events Scale (ACEs), Everyday Discrimination Scale, the Centers for Epidemiology Scale for Depression (CES-D), and the 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale (GAD-7). Tests of indirect effects suggested, working conditions mediated the effects of ACEs, immigration legal status fears, and discrimination on CES-D and GAD-7 scores (p values < .05). Higher ACEs and discrimination also appeared to be associated with larger effects of harsh working conditions on depression and anxiety (p values < .05), while legal status fears did not significantly moderate the effect of harsh working conditions on either outcome (p values > .05). Likely through different mechanisms, adverse childhood experiences, discrimination and immigration legal status are associated with higher risk of harsh working conditions and subsequently these conditions account for much of the relations between these 3 stressors with depression and anxiety. Additionally, discrimination and adverse childhood experiences appear to then enhance the effects of working conditions.

No abstract

Method Two hundred Hispanic emerging adults from Arizona (n = 99) and Florida (n = 101) completed a cross‐sectional survey, and data were analyzed using hierarchical multiple regression and moderation analyses. Results Higher social media discrimination was associated with higher symptoms of depression and generalized anxiety. Moderation analyses indicated that higher social media discrimination was only associated with symptoms of depression and generalized anxiety among men, but not women. Conclusion This is likely the first study on social media discrimination and mental health among emerging adults; thus, expanding this emerging field of research to a distinct developmental period.

The current study examines the moderating role of traditional machismo on mental health outcomes. We hypothesized that machismo would enhance the effects of stressors that are incongruent with traditional machismo beliefs (discrimination, adverse childhood experiences [ACEs], and fear of deportation) on depression and anxiety outcomes but would not enhance stressors that are congruent (harsh working conditions and poverty) on depression and anxiety. Participants were 190 male Mexican migrant farmworkers. As hypothesized, endorsing high traditional machismo was associated with stronger effects of fear of deportation and discrimination on depression outcomes compared with low traditional machismo. The interaction of machismo and ACEs was not significant in predicting depression or anxiety. Moreover, machismo did not moderate the effects of poverty or harsh working conditions on depression or anxiety outcomes. Results partially supported our hypotheses and suggested that the effect of machismo on depression may be better understood in the context of value-incongruent stressors.

Research with immigrant Latino populations often point to findings that immigrants tend to evidence better health outcomes than nonimmigrants. When exploring differences based on nativity, comparisons often end with just comparing these two groups. Exploring these variables alone may oversimplify the shared and unique paths of risk and resilience between these groups. Experimental research shows that discrimination is often directed toward immigrants, but U.S.-born Latinos report more frequent exposure. We sought to address this by examining two distinct pathways by which discrimination leads to negative health. A sample of 240 Latino migrant farmworkers completed questionnaires regarding immigration-related fears, discrimination, physical and mental health, demographics, and other outcomes. While U.S.-born participants reported similar or worse outcomes across health measures, the pathways to these outcomes appeared to differ between the two groups, with immigration-related fears accounting for substantial portions of these health outcomes, especially in the dual paths with discrimination (p values <.05). Simply comparing Latino groups across U.S. nativity may paper over important differences in how they arrive at those health outcomes, including that immigration-related concerns may exacerbate exposure to and severity of discrimination, which in turn leads to negative health outcomes. On the other hand, discrimination itself may account for numerous negative health outcomes more directly for U.S.-born Latinos.

Treatments of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) often evidence high rates of dropout, ranging from 25% to 40%, among English-speaking samples. Written Exposure Therapy (WET), a novel manualized treatment for PTSD, evidences lower dropout rates and noninferiority to CPT, one of the most efficacious interventions for PTSD. Spanish-speaking Latinxs often experience greater dropout and barriers to care. WET appears promising for this population, but acceptability and perceived barriers to WET have not been examined among Spanish-speaking Latinxs. The present study assessed perceptions and acceptability of a Spanish-language version of WET among Spanish-speaking Latinxs who scored greater than 45 on the Spanish-language version of the PCL-IV, indicating likely PTSD (n = 20) and providers (n = 12). Participants completed a mixed-methods interview regarding reasons they/clients would not want to receive the treatment, why they/clients would want to receive the treatment, potential solutions for any identified barriers, and reasons for not seeking mental health services generally. Providers, but not potential recipients, identified low literacy as a barrier for WET. Providers and potential recipients identified time as a barrier to WET and other mental health services, but the time reduction was perceived as a potential facilitator of WET. Results also suggest no specific cultural barriers were identified for WET (e.g., provider cultural competency) and that Spanish WET may reduce time-related barriers and is perceived as effective and acceptable among Spanish-speaking Latinxs. Additional work is needed to expand the reach of the intervention, given that mental health services were often perceived as untrustworthy. Impact StatementThis study suggests that a Spanish-language adaptation of Written Exposure Therapy, a novel manualized treatment for PTSD symptoms, may be effective in reducing some structural barriers that Spanish-speaking Latinx populations encounter when using mental health services.

No abstract